Endymion Dante

Sydney, New South Wales, AUSTRALIA


Joined May 11th 2006

Number of Posts:
4

Number of Comments:
2

Karma:
1



Why? Why must people, hungry, die?

About Me
Hi my name is Endymion. I'm a student of philosophy and botany at the University of Sydney, Australia. My interests include philosophy and botany of course, but also, scuba diving, rock climbing, bush walking, poetry, literature, politics, french language and culture, and music.

Blogs

Endymion Dante's Blogs

0 Vote(s)
0 Comment(s)
0 Post(s)
0 Vote(s)
0 Comment(s)
0 Post(s)

I mentor these bloggers

Learn more about the Orble Mentoring Program.


I do not mentor any bloggers.

Friends

I have no friends :(

Recent Posts

The role of God?

May 23rd 2006 00:14
The role of God?

Today I will talk about the role of religion in ethics. Because this is a large topic today I will simply introduce the main themes. Firstly I will need to say a little about what religion is then I will look at how various religions are related to ethics and finish by mentioning what I see as the most controversial issues in religious ethics today.

What religion is…
The Dalai Lama had respect for all faiths because he said all religion aims to make people better people. The truth of this is perhaps controversial but it does point to a shared aspect of all religions. In some way or another every religion concerns itself with ethics. Of course ethics not the entire scope of any religion. Most religions also entail a system of metaphysical belief. (Concisely, metaphysics is the philosophical investigation of the nature, constitution and structure of reality.) Often the metaphysical beliefs of a faith impact greatly on the ethical framework arising out of those faiths. For our purposes here, we need to know two things about religion; that it concerns itself with ethics and that it entails a metaphysical foundation.

Those of you who read yesterdays post will remember that I talked briefly about Christianity in the context of ethical frameworks. Today I will talk more generally about theistic religions. Theistic religions posit one or many divine beings. The ancient Greek’s believed in a pantheon of gods. Other religions including Christianity and Islamism believe in a single god. In all cases the notion of right and wrong is linked to the god (or gods).

God is often taken as an axiom of the ethical framework. Within Christianity God might be seen as the divine arbiter of right and wrong conduct. The 10 commandments are the word of God and must be obeyed because they are the will of God. In all instances the good accords with God’s will. On this interpretation the good is good precisely because God wills it. As said yesterday there are problems with this interpretation. What if God had commanded us to rape and murder? Would it then be right to rape and murder? Most of us I think would say no. It may be a tempting answer to say that God would not command such things but this appears to point at a notion of objective good that doesn’t originate with God. This provides an alternative interpretation; God perceives the good and commands it. This interpretation is also problematic. However the point here is simply to illustrate the connectedness of Christianity’s metaphysical beliefs with its ethical framework.

Unfortunately my knowledge of other religions is limited so I won’t attempt to provide further examples at this introductory stage. Suffice it to say that in general other religions also use elements of their metaphysical belief systems as axioms within their ethical frameworks.

Now I will briefly mention a few of the current issues surrounding religion and ethics. Firstly, globalisation, international travel and immigration have resulted in members of divergent faiths living and working in close proximity. Members of different faiths carry different ethical frameworks. To avoid conflict it is necessary to exercise toleration towards other faiths. However the mixing of faiths and cultures prompts a few important questions. Which faith is right? Can more than one faith be right? To what extent do faiths disagree anyway? I will return to these questions when I discuss ethical relativism.

Another contentious issue is the role of religion in governance. Why is this important to ethics? As I will discuss later when I turn to the ethics of politics, governments need an ethical justification and an ethical framework from which to operate. Of course this relates back to the previous issue, in a multi faith state shouldn’t government be secular? What role did conservative Christian values have the US invasion of Iraq? Also important here is Sharia law in modern nations. Is it legitimate ethically?

Many modern ethical dilemmas take on religious arguments and standpoints. For example the abortion debate and the stem cell debate are dominated by religious argumentation. Likewise the debate over sexuality and homosexual union and marriage involves many religious arguments. These three examples are important and fascinating debates and will be discussed separately at a latter stage.

Other more theoretical questions may be asked. Is ethics without religion possible? Atheists (including myself) need to find a justifiable ethical framework whilst religions give their followers a ready packaged product. Can an ethics that transcends faith be found? Is there one single objective good? And if so, which faith if any gets it right? Or is ethics relative?

So I hope I have conveyed the basics of religion and ethics. How a person’s religion provides them with an ethical framework and how this framework takes metaphysical beliefs as its axioms. In the future we will look in more detail at a few religious ethical frameworks as well as discussing how the various religious ethical frameworks impact on ethical issues.
92
Vote
   


Introduction

May 22nd 2006 00:02
Thanks for joining me at the ethics box this glorious Monday morning. This week you can look forward to reading these great posts…

Tuesday: The role of God?
Wednesday: The objective good?
Thursday: Are we all selfish?
Friday: Let’s get a little Kantian…

Next weeks focus: The ethics of Sex

Today I’ll introduce you to the very basics of ethical theory.

The fundamental question in ethics is: how are we to live our lives? Ethics is about deciding what is right and what is wrong, about how one ought to behave, and about what our goals and motivations should be. However in the process of considering ethical questions deeper questions arise. What does is mean for an action to be right or wrong? What is the basis of our judgements, where does ethics come from? Is there only one correct answer to ethical quandaries? Is ethics even possible?

So what does this all mean? Let’s take an example action: putting my rubbish in a bin. The goal of ethics is to determine the value of this action. Is it the right thing to do? Is there a better action I should perform instead? In order to address these questions we need a process for doing so, perhaps a set of criteria against which actions should be evaluated. Forming a process for determining the value of actions is perhaps the most important aspect of ethics. We need to decide what it is that defines the moral value of an action. Answers to this question are numerous and divergent. Hence the further question arrises as to whether more than one answer is possible, if indeed any answer is possible, to ethical problems.

I am going to call the process by which we determine the value of actions our ‘ethical framework’. The ethical framework is made up of basic rules, or axioms, and general rules, or principles. For example; one ethical framework belongs to Christianity. The axioms of this framework are the realm of theology. The foremost of these axioms is the existence of an omnipotent god. It is not our purpose here to define what god is but we do need a basic definition. For this purpose I will define god as an omnipotent (all powerful), omniscient (all knowing) and omni-benevolent (all good) higher being. This may or may not be what all of Christianity means by God but it is close enough for our purposes.

So what we want to know is what role god plays in ethics. Not being a believer it is perhaps presumptions of me to attempt an answer. I hope I get close and do no offend anyone (note that if you feel I have erred on this you are more than welcome to post a comment and I will do my best to answer you). God can either be seen as the ‘good maker’ or the ‘good seer’. God as good maker is the source of moral laws. The good is simply what accords with god’s will. God as good seer perceives the objective good and relates this to us. The good exists outside of God and she/he/it knows the good and teaches us. The trouble with god as good seer is that she/he/it was defined as all powerful but now is without the power over right and wrong. Further god is defined as all good. If god makes the good then to describe she/he/it as all good is meaningless. To do so is to effectively say; ‘God acts in accordance with her/his/its will’. Also we may tend to think that even if God said that murder was right it would still be wrong. Either way, religion provides an ethical framework. With the existence of God as the primary axiom, with specific rules (eg the 10 commandments), and with religious texts and theology providing the general rules or guiding principles.

As we can see the issue is far from simple. These are the sorts of problems that plague all ‘ethical frameworks’. We will return to religion and ethics in the future. We will also look at other ethical frameworks. For example, we will look at consequentialist frameworks such as utilitarianism, as well as non-conseguentialist frameworks such as daeontology (duty ethics) as well as looking at the Kantian categorical imperative.

I’ll finish this introduction by offering a few definitions…

Ethics: is primarily concerned with how we ought to live.
Ethical framework: the system of axioms and principles that enables one to make moral evaluations.
Consequentialism: encompasses all ethical frameworks which make moral evaluations according to the consequences of actions.
Non-consequentialist: ethical frameworks make moral evaluations according to something contained in the act itself regardless of consequences.
Daeontology: a non-consequentialist ethical framework built around duty.
Categorical imperative: Kantian ethical framework in which moral evaluations of actions are made according to whether those actions should be universalised. We should act only in ways that could be universalised.
Utilitarianism: ethical framework that makes moral evaluations according to how well an action produces some result, the ultimate good. Eg J S Mill believed moral evaluations should be based upon the degree to which actions produce happiness, the well known slogan being “the greatest happiness for the greatest number”.

… and by recommending a few books…

Peter Singer’s Ethics Published by Oxford University Press, Oxford 1994

and,

John Stuart Mill’s Utilitarianism Published by Longmans, London 1891 (note that this essay can be found in many books).
93
Vote
   


Apologies

May 15th 2006 09:23
Hi everyone,
I am sorry that the ethics box has been slow to get going. I anticipate regular posts will begin on Monday 22nd May. From then on new posts will be added every weekday (ie not on weekends).
88
Vote
   


Welcome

May 12th 2006 23:40
Welcome to the ethics box

The ethics box will provide you with an accessible and informative mixture of academic philosophy and contemporary philosophical debate. The primary focus of the ethics box will be normative moral theory. Posts will range from meta-ethical theory through to applied ethical analysis of contemporary ethical problems


[ Click here to read more ]
101
Vote
   


 

Recent Comments

Comment by Endymion Dante
on Raymond Chandler and Where To R.I.P?

May 23rd 2006 00:26
That's a great question. I think once your dead your dead and that's it. Where your body decomposes has absolutely no impact on you, your dead finished end of story! Of course it does matter to your loved ones. Some people might believe in an after life. In which case it still doesn't matter where your body is, you have no use for it... Another interesting question is whether we should respect the wishes of the dead or not. They won't know the difference anyway! Quite an interesting ethical dilemma...

Comment by Endymion Dante
on Welcome

May 13th 2006 08:04
Legal ethics is a difficult issue. Although at this early stage I will not be addressing legal ethics, it may come up in the future. As may legal philosophy as well. Note that all of ethics is essentially connected so keep reading as many of the posts may be relevant. As for legal ethics being an oxymoron, ethics covers both good and bad acts (although the legal profession may choose to ignore the issue...).